Search Forums

If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

9/11..... How do 3 buildings collapse because of 2 planes?

9/11.. 3 buildings collapsed like a stack of pancakes into their own footprint at freefall speed?

3,000 architects, engineers, firefighters, and demolitions experts have said there is no way those buildings collapsed in that way because of airplanes.

Please research building 7 before responding to this post. Most people don't even know it fell. Not only did it fall, it was obviously a controlled demolition according to experts. Go look at a you tube video on building 7 first, please, and discuss.

"Free-fall" speed is not only a nonsensical term in this context, but as has been shown, doesn't occur by the definition most inside job advocates use.

There wasn't a 3000 engineer list either, as far as I'm aware. I think you are referring to the 2000 list? If so, there is a major problem with that. Except for a small handful (less than 10) none of those were certified. It was an internet petition that asked you to fill in what your degree was in. It didn't verify that claim nor did it ask even if you were actively working in that field.

As for the titular 3 buildings two planes issue, given the amount of debris, I'm not even sure how this is an issue. Isn't that a bit like saying, dominos is impossible because it involves knocking down 6 bricks with only 1 touch?

"Suffering lies not with inequality, but with dependence." -Voltaire

"Fallacies do not cease to be fallacies because they become fashions.” -G.K. Chesterton

Re: 9/11..... How do 3 buildings collapse because of 2 planes?

now I am not going to do this for people and will only bring about due to a level of anonymity I have here since this would be a career killer for me and my future.

1) Formula to find free fall rate of any structure
2) compare to longest fall time of any tower on 9/11 vs free fall rate
3) Use same formula and compare to controlled demolitions free fall vs. actual
4) Get a resistance ratio, this can be explained by atmospherics pressure and equipartition theorem. Fairly complex.
5) The ratio of resistance is not adequate, it does not account for material resistance i.e. what the building was made of, only air pressure of each floor.
6) Also apply law of angular momentum to the toppling that occurred on tower that started to topple.
7) Apply mass of top floors beginning to topple to resistance of materials below and a coefficient of loss of resistance compared to angular momentum. The amount of resistance that needed not to be there to a allow mass leaning(toppling) to fall straight (roughly) down (equals nearly 0 actually) same coefficient is a constant in all such physical reactions.

Some explanation: If a standing object breaks away from its lower part it will fall in the direction of least resistance, once a resistance is met angular momentum takes over, once angular momentum starts there is no stopping it unless no further resistance is met and the point of pressure between broken top and fixed base. Now some will say air would suffice well no mass of structure even on a square will overcome air resistance the square will slightly turn(twist) to an angle to offset resistance as it still continues to topple. It would have a corner falling ahead to cut through air but toppling does not stop. There is more but leave off there since I need to get to work. oh should note lift will offset angular momentum but this will be obvious and easily observed reaction.

I am not posting the math I did this to disprove conspiracy theories since I found no comparison to already observed demolitions. I was amazed but am just starting as a student in Mathematical Physics and know this will kill my career. I am not making a stand for conspiracy but if you have the skills to do this do it, you will be surprised, I guarantee, I was, still am. Especially the toppling it just doesn't make physical sense yet I cannot draw a conclusion on how it happened only that the numbers do not line up with known physical formula's and laws. i do agree if these people saying it was a conspiracy were trained highly why not mention angular momentum, I went to the Architect and Engineer for Truth cite but found all their stuff very opinion based with little mathematical analysis shown and that I did find was wrong actually but same with the skeptics rebuttal as well.

Re: 9/11..... How do 3 buildings collapse because of 2 planes?

Originally Posted by Excubis

now I am not going to do this for people and will only bring about due to a level of anonymity I have here since this would be a career killer for me and my future.

If you do it right, it would not kill your career but on the contrary, it would garner worldwide recognition and perhaps even you be the spotlight in some science show documentary. Unfortunately for you, it's all been done already.

Re: 9/11..... How do 3 buildings collapse because of 2 planes?

Seen it still doesn't show the numbers only an animation. Numbers do not lie but simulations can. Also Greening is a Chemist for one all papers even numbers used in his simulation always say "about" for g between floors, you cannot do this "about" may work in some chemistry but not physics and this is a pure mathematical physics problem/solution and you can only use know actualities to draw value based conclusion. Sorry about is not good enough and does it mention angular momentum?

Re: 9/11..... How do 3 buildings collapse because of 2 planes?

9/11.. 3 buildings collapsed like a stack of pancakes into their own footprint at freefall speed?

3,000 architects, engineers, firefighters, and demolitions experts have said there is no way those buildings collapsed in that way because of airplanes.

Please research building 7 before responding to this post. Most people don't even know it fell. Not only did it fall, it was obviously a controlled demolition according to experts. Go look at a you tube video on building 7 first, please, and discuss.

Re: 9/11..... How do 3 buildings collapse because of 2 planes?

The OP has one good point. Most people dont know about tower 7. The official story is that debris from the north tower fell on tower 7 causing several fires. Fires burned for hours eventually causing the building to collapse and resemble a controlled demolition.

Can you find any other case of a building collapsing due to steel melting from a fire burning several hours or even days...? Besides on 9/11?

Tower 7 was 300 ft away from the north tower and heavy debris didn't reach it. Tower 6 which was between the 2 buildings and did not collapse NOTE. http://www.wtc7.net/location.html

Re: 9/11..... How do 3 buildings collapse because of 2 planes?

Originally Posted by Michael

Can you find any other case of a building collapsing due to steel melting from a fire burning several hours or even days...? Besides on 9/11?

No, it never happened before. It goes without saying that it was everything but a normal day and, it was no regular fire. Nonetheless, the norms by which structures need to be built in the future has been updated since 9/11 based on 30 recommendations made by NIST. (By the way, the fire did not melt the steel, it only made it weaker and less able to support the weight it's intended to support)

Tower 7 was 300 ft away from the north tower and heavy debris didn't reach it. Tower 6 which was between the 2 buildings and did not collapse NOTE. http://www.wtc7.net/location.html

Not sure what you mean by heavy debris.... Most of the debris of the north tower fell on its own foot print, but many fragments were thrown hundreds of feet away. Pieces of WTC 1 hit WTC 7, severing six columns on Floors 7 through 17 on the south face and one column on the west face near the southwest corner. The debris also caused structural damage between Floor 44 and the roof. The first responders also found that there was no water in the hydrant system to fight the fires.

At 14h30, it was decided to stop any attempts at saving the building as it was evaluated to be in danger of collapse.

Of course if required, there is photographic, video, and witness account to back this up.

OK, so WTC 6 did not collapse... So what? It was nonetheless a total loss and utterly destroyed by debris.

In order to prevent dilution of the debate, I'll address the point about exercises separately after this subject is exhausted.

Last edited by Vandaler; December 17th, 2015 at 07:12 AM.

A good hockey player plays where the puck is. A great hockey player plays where the puck is going to be.
- Wayne Gretzky